McKewon: Are We Overestimating Our Ability to Run the Ball

[carlfense]

McKewon seems to think so and the stats seem to support it.

And that would be a mistake -- because it would give rise to a false impression that Nebraska was better at playing offense -- specifically running the ball -- than it actually was.

http://www.omaha.com/huskers/blogs/analysis-running-to-more-daylight/article_fd2ae714-2936-11e4-ad6d-001a4bcf6878.html

 

[SouthAfricanHusker]

I think he is discounting the line we had to play with last year. Also a hurt Armstrong or non running threat of Kellogg gave the D an advantage.

If we stay healthy we will be fine. Lewis Cotton on the left will give us an advantage we haven't had in years.

 

[kchusker_chris]

I think he is discounting the line we had to play with last year. Also a hurt Armstrong or non running threat of Kellogg gave the D an advantage.

If we stay healthy we will be fine. Lewis Cotton on the left will give us an advantage we haven't had in years.

you mean the last 4-5 years? we've been "rebuilding" the pipeline for years now.

 

[deedsker]

I think he is discounting the line we had to play with last year. Also a hurt Armstrong or non running threat of Kellogg gave the D an advantage.

If we stay healthy we will be fine. Lewis Cotton on the left will give us an advantage we haven't had in years.

you mean the last 4-5 years? we've been "rebuilding" the pipeline for years now.

Last years O-Line was amazing...too bad the best of them didn't get to play all year.

 

[Scratchtown]

I think he is discounting the line we had to play with last year. Also a hurt Armstrong or non running threat of Kellogg gave the D an advantage.

If we stay healthy we will be fine. Lewis Cotton on the left will give us an advantage we haven't had in years.

You can't really say that with 100% certainty.

Thats good stuff, that is objective, stat driven information. I expect us to be a lot better on the oLine. I'm also curious to see who jumps to the "YOU CAN SPIN ANY STAT TO FIT YOUR AGENDA" garbage.

 

[HUSKER FREAK]

Overestimating you've got to be kidding me! If our Oline stays healthy along with our backs we will have a very good ground attack this year.

 

[kchusker_chris]

Overestimating you've got to be kidding me! If our Oline stays healthy along with our backs we will have a very good ground attack this year.

But if our passing is crap and they load the box all day long - it won't matter how good our OL and backs are.

"Nebraska ranked 90th in yards per play against FBS winning teams. The run didn't set up the pass. The pass didn't set up the run. "

 

[Scratchtown]

Ryker Fyfe.

 

[Junior]

I think one of the biggest issues with our offense is lack of identity. What is the one thing you do well? You need 5 yards, what is the play that almost always gets it? We haven't really had that under Beck. You just keep hearing that we want to be multiple. Multiple. Jack of all trades, master of none.

 

[carlfense]

I think one of the biggest issues with our offense is lack of identity. What is the one thing you do well? You need 5 yards, what is the play that almost always gets it?

Toss.

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

I think one of the biggest issues with our offense is lack of identity. What is the one thing you do well? You need 5 yards, what is the play that almost always gets it? We haven't really had that under Beck. You just keep hearing that we want to be multiple. Multiple. Jack of all trades, master of none.

See I think McKewon's excellent analysis suggests the exact opposite. The dominant teams, which presumably have this offensive "identity" we crave, are efficient at both running and passing the ball. When it's 3rd and 5 they don't have one play that almost always gets it. They have a few to choose from, because every defense has film of every game. Their offensive success isn't from creating an identity, unless that identity is good athletes who are mentally prepared and able to execute a diverse play selection. The Top 10 is full of teams who are master of all trades. That's where excellence comes from.

I think we have a promising offense and should have a solid running game. McKewon's point seems to be that memories of Nebraska's impressive running attack are pretty selective, and dreams of just ramming Abdullah down the opponent's throat might be misguided.

 

[RedRedJarvisRedwine]

Are we overestimating our local medias ability to analyze our football team?

 

[Guy Chamberlin]

Are we overestimating our local medias ability to analyze our football team?

Are we presuming the online fanbase is better at it?

 

[Scratchtown]

I think one of the biggest issues with our offense is lack of identity. What is the one thing you do well? You need 5 yards, what is the play that almost always gets it? We haven't really had that under Beck. You just keep hearing that we want to be multiple. Multiple. Jack of all trades, master of none.

See I think McKewon's excellent analysis suggests the exact opposite. The dominant teams, which presumably have this offensive "identity" we crave, are efficient at both running and passing the ball. When it's 3rd and 5 they don't have one play that almost always gets it. They have a few to choose from, because every defense has film of every game. Their offensive success isn't from creating an identity, unless that identity is good athletes who are mentally prepared and able to execute a diverse play selection. The Top 10 is full of teams who are master of all trades. That's where excellence comes from.

I think we have a promising offense and should have a solid running game. McKewon's point seems to be that memories of Nebraska's impressive running attack are pretty selective, and dreams of just ramming Abdullah down the opponent's throat might be misguided.

I would say this. I don't necessarily disagree but I don't fully agree either. I was listening to a bit of Mark Richt and he was talking about Georgia Tech and their "identity" which is "Option Football" but out of the Wing T/Double Wing/Flexbone...whatever. If Georgia Tech had great defense with what they run as an offense, you would see another Stanford type program. Because of them "bucking the trend" of offense in today's game.

In terms of the "master of all trades". It's my belief that teams such as Alabama, USC, Oregon...pick whoever. They aren't Spreading you out 1 play and then going to a double tight I formation. They run things that systematically and schematically play off the play before. Nebraska has ALWAYS (Watson and Beck era) seem to pull plays out of a hat rather than be thinking 4-5 plays ahead and what you are setting up.

Look at Stanford's loss at Utah. They decided to try to spread them out late in that game when they were averaging 6+ yards a carry, ultimately going away from their identity.

You have to have an identity. The reason those teams seem to have this "master of trades" look is because they are SO GOOD at what they what to accomplish primarily, the defense of their opponents allow for secondary schematics stuff work and look better.

You have to be GREAT at your primary identity/scheme before you can move on to secondary things.

That's my take, and a little bit of my philosophy. If you don't agree, that's fine. Everyone has a different view of how things should be run. That's what makes football great.